OBJECTIVE: To implement and evaluate a multimodal intervention to improve osteoporosis treatment in patients with a fragility fracture. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Strategies to improve the management of patients discharged from an emergency department after presentation with fragility fracture were implemented prospectively in a large tertiary public hospital. Patients were surveyed by post to assess their awareness of osteoporosis and of the need for treatment. General practitioners and hospital clinicians completed an online questionnaire about their attitudes to osteoporosis and its management. A simplified consensus guideline was developed for local use. Our study was conducted between 1 October 2007 and 31 October 2008. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of referral of patients for osteoporosis review; rates of investigation and treatment. RESULTS: Although most GPs (259/306 [85%]) accepted that it was their responsibility to assess and treat their patients and inform them of their osteoporosis risk, only 35/87 patients (40%) indicated awareness of their risk. After implementation of our project, the rate of bone mineral densitometry investigations improved from 6/200 (3%) to 39/87 (45%) (P < 0.05). The number of patients receiving calcium and vitamin D supplementation increased from 24/200 (12%) (for both supplements) to 29/87 (33%) and 32/87 (37%), respectively (P < 0.05). Initiation of specific treatments increased from 12/200 (6%) to 26/87 (30%) (P < 0.05). Referral of eligible patients to the Fragile Bone Clinic for osteoporosis review improved from 20/500 (4%) to 51/194 (26%). After being contacted by a fracture liaison nurse, 84% of these patients presented for osteoporosis review in the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: A major key to improving osteoporosis management is to actively identify all patients at risk and proactively engage and encourage them to seek assessment and management. A multimodal strategy involving a dedicated fracture liaison nurse may offer the greatest potential for improving education and patient follow-up and treatment.
OBJECTIVE: To implement and evaluate a multimodal intervention to improve osteoporosis treatment in patients with a fragility fracture. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Strategies to improve the management of patients discharged from an emergency department after presentation with fragility fracture were implemented prospectively in a large tertiary public hospital. Patients were surveyed by post to assess their awareness of osteoporosis and of the need for treatment. General practitioners and hospital clinicians completed an online questionnaire about their attitudes to osteoporosis and its management. A simplified consensus guideline was developed for local use. Our study was conducted between 1 October 2007 and 31 October 2008. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of referral of patients for osteoporosis review; rates of investigation and treatment. RESULTS: Although most GPs (259/306 [85%]) accepted that it was their responsibility to assess and treat their patients and inform them of their osteoporosis risk, only 35/87 patients (40%) indicated awareness of their risk. After implementation of our project, the rate of bone mineral densitometry investigations improved from 6/200 (3%) to 39/87 (45%) (P < 0.05). The number of patients receiving calcium and vitamin D supplementation increased from 24/200 (12%) (for both supplements) to 29/87 (33%) and 32/87 (37%), respectively (P < 0.05). Initiation of specific treatments increased from 12/200 (6%) to 26/87 (30%) (P < 0.05). Referral of eligible patients to the Fragile Bone Clinic for osteoporosis review improved from 20/500 (4%) to 51/194 (26%). After being contacted by a fracture liaison nurse, 84% of these patients presented for osteoporosis review in the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: A major key to improving osteoporosis management is to actively identify all patients at risk and proactively engage and encourage them to seek assessment and management. A multimodal strategy involving a dedicated fracture liaison nurse may offer the greatest potential for improving education and patient follow-up and treatment.
Authors: K Ganda; M Puech; J S Chen; R Speerin; J Bleasel; J R Center; J A Eisman; L March; M J Seibel Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: P R Ebeling; D-C Chan; T C Lau; J K Lee; T Songpatanasilp; S H Wong; F L Hew; R Sethi; M Williams Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Charles A Inderjeeth; Warren D Raymond; Elizabeth Geelhoed; Andrew M Briggs; David Oldham; David Mountain Journal: Australas J Ageing Date: 2022-07-10 Impact factor: 1.876
Authors: K Akesson; D Marsh; P J Mitchell; A R McLellan; J Stenmark; D D Pierroz; C Kyer; C Cooper Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2013-04-16 Impact factor: 4.507